Heeven wrote:I went out to dinner with a guy-friend from home recently. As we were walking along the street, to and from our destinations, I noticed he walked on the traffic-side of the street. I deliberately tried to walk at the sidewalk edge when we crossed a street to see if he did anything and he unconsciously put an arm around my shoulders and gently steered me inside him as he walked on the outside. My mom had told me, growing up, that this was one of the things men were taught, to be courteous to women. I don't find that offensive, in fact I was touched. It told me that he cared and was being polite.
Another chivalrous thing that 'touches' me is when a male (of any age) lets a female go first - off a train, off an elevator, through a door first. It gives me a cozy, warm feeling.
I don't need either of the above gestures. It's not like I'd get upset if they never happened to me again. But they are just nice. It's probably more about manners than being chivalrous.
If a guy were to ask me out on a date, I would assume he is paying for that dinner. If I reciprocate and ask him to go to a movie/play/dinner with me, then I expect to pay. From there on, it is either split or he pays for dinner and I pay for show or he pays one date and I pay next. I don't keep to tight a tab on who pays but I might have a sub-conscious issue if he insisted on paying for everything.
I'm not concerned about car doors or opening doors or all the other stuff. We all do for each other when someone needs a hand.
As for the 'expecting sex' issue, I am very comfortable with speaking my mind with a man I am dating and having my own timeline about when I am ready to do something - kissing, sex, etc. I'll know when I'm ready and I'm pretty sure I will communicate that to him clearly. I have no problem telling a guy that sex is not on the cards and I don't care if it is the third date and it's expected. I don't keep other peoples schedules and if a guy doesn't like that or peer pressures me - he's gone. I actually dated a guy for six months without sex and he was delighted to have the sex-issue on the back-burner while we really got to know each other. Now I know that is practically unheard of these days when we are all expected to have golden globe awards in oral sex on the first date, but at times I like to dance to the beat of my own drum.
I couldn't have said it better :-D
Atavistic wrote:Montana wrote:
He knows he'd probebly never have to protect me
Is that right? So if a 250 lb. man attacked you, do you honestly think you would stand a chance?
Depends who the 250 lb man is ;-) I'm strong, I'm fast and I use to go out with a cop who trained me on how to defend myself.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall ;-)
Anyway, the guy I'm crazy about would, no doubt, be there in a heart beat to "help" protect me if I was ever attacked by anyone and I would gladly give him a nice big kiss to show my appreciation
Interesting post, Heeven. Just to show you how antiquated my manners are, I was taught not to let a woman precede me, getting off a train. The man should get off first, then hold out his hand to help the lady descend the couple of steps. I still do that. (Not on subways, of course, where the train is level with the platform and there are no steps to descend. I'm talking about real trains and trolleys and buses.)
I was extending my arms to help a lady off a train once and right before her hands touched mine I heard a friend shout. I turned to wave to my friend and the lady, now off balance because of my waving gesture, fell onto the tracks and had both her legs cut off.
We're still friends and I sometimes wheel her down to the park so she can feed the ducks.
Good story, Gus. Glad you're still friends.
(!)
Don't listen to Gus, Mame. He pushed her.
I'm seeing many of you finding this all charming. Ain't so charming if it is strictured, and it was, for a time in my young life. Though I too find it sort of charming now, my sense of the charm is just less.
I am younger than only a few, like Merry Andrew, and older than, say, Roger. Bet my teachers were stricter.
It's because of whiners of my generation you all think these things are lovely romantic gestures instead of traps to rail about.
ossobuco wrote:I'm seeing many of you finding this all charming. Ain't so charming if it is strictured, and it was, for a time in my young life. Though I too find it sort of charming now, my sense of the charm is just less.
I am younger than only a few, like Merry Andrew, and older than, say, Roger. Bet my teachers were stricter.
It's because of whiners of my generation you all think these things are lovely romantic gestures instead of traps to rail about.
Speak for yourself. There's plenty of women that didn't mind it. You want to talk about whiners? What do you call the whole PC, "total equality" crowd?
Of course I speak for myself.
Hola!!!
Unless we grew up on Mars, we were all brought up to stand up and give our seat to a blind person or a senior on a bus; we were all raised to thank our host/ess for a lovely evening; we all let the elderly/infirm/enceinte into a taxi first... call it whatever you want, it's just bloody manners.
All this talk about chivalry - come one - is it NOT just plain manners????? Some of it may be outdated (okay, walking on street-side to protect the wee female's expensive multi-petticoateded-dress against the horse dung no long applies!)... but it's manners just the same.
There are men in my office bldg who let me in the elevator first ... there's no reason for it, no necessity, but you know what, who cares? I mean, we're all getting on and off the same damn floors! I just nod, say thank you, and we're all happy.
It takes generations to make changesk, so this one will be a while, but frankly, I'm in no hurry. I feel good knowing my aged MIL is going to get good to excellent treatment from taxi or bus drivers, hoteliers, etc because of her age.
It's a weird one, but I'm not agin the way it was.
And WHATEVER about it being charming - it's not about that to me.... and when you deny a man his 'upbringing', you deny everyone that.
Excellent points, Mame. Much of all this is nothing more than 'good manners' tradition and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. To somehow read male chauvinism or a male dominance drive into what is no more than perceived good manners is being slightly paranoid, IMO. Equally self-serving is any male's contention that he does these things because he is stronger and therefore a woman's protector. What pitiful rot. He does these things because he was taught that it's the polite thing to do.
Mame, I agree with your excellent post up a couple. Well said!
Where have I said one shouldn't help people? be courteous?
There was something wrong about a woman having to sit in a car until the fellow let her out of it.
Yes, that's just plain stupid... like opening door-doors... is she supposed to stand there and wait until a gentleman comes along? Were her arms always full so she couldn't open it herself? What is the rationale behind that one? And why should the guy get mud spray on his pant legs but she can't get it on hers? Those 'conventions' are the ones that imply women are weak and need help. All anyone's saying is don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Not all behaviours are condescending to women.
In the Middle Ages, women were not coddled and protected like this. I don't know exactly when or why it started, but it seemed to reach its peak in the Victorian Era, along with righteousness. That was a very strange period in history.
Merry Andrew wrote: Equally self-serving is any male's contention that he does these things because he is stronger and therefore a woman's protector. What pitiful rot. .
Are you implying that the man is not stronger?
Mame wrote: Those 'conventions' are the ones that imply women are weak and need help.
Many women do need help with certain things. Is there something wrong with that?
